Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up - View Single Post - My 20-race cycle (9/6-9/11)

rdiam · 09-12-2018, 01:26 PM

Jeebs/Navyvet:

Please don't forget the mindset needed to truly make $ betting horses. We are not looking to pick winners. If you want to pick winners, there is nothing better than the tote board, since favorites currently win close to 40% of the time. In fact, if you limit the subset to favorites going off less than even money, you will hit close to 50%. But here is the catch: you will lose $.

Instead, look at this as a game of probability versus payout. Every horse has some finite chance to win. By selecting "win contenders" we are trying to reduce the workload and narrow the field. If the favorite is legit, win bets are probably a pass since most cannot compete with the implied lower takeout the large bettors receive via substantial rebates.

You can only earn $ in the 60% or so races where the favorite is vulnerable, or even better, is false and likely to run out of the money. This is where one's efforts should be focused: which 1 or 2 (or sometimes even 3) horses can beat the favorite. At a minimum, if you cannot classify the favorite as vulnerable, you need to find at least 1 horse going off at 3-1 or less that will not win in order to overcome the track take.

This is the math of the game we play.

Regarding software and screens (Navyvet): by all means use what you like, but remember your goal is the find the 60% or so races where the favorite is vulnerable or false. But: we are in the midst of a technological revolution. Just like the I-phone has evolved since its introduction in 2007, so too has the Sartin methodology via RDSS. The last real contribution by Sartin et al was VDC. It is still quite useful and powerful, but it still relies on pace line selection. Why not also use more recent and powerful items such as CSR, CR+, PL, Rx3 (and soon to come in Rx+ BPP)? Sure, they are not "pure" Sartin, but remember, he is not around anymore to advance things. And most of the pure Sartin stuff was developed and programmed when current programming languages had not even been invented!

Bottom line: let the software do the grunt work (picking pacelines, doing the matchup, comparing velocity versus deceleration, calculating speed and class, even picking contenders), and focus on finding first races where the favorite is vulnerable, and second which horses are contenders to beat the favorite, and third, whether you are getting sufficiently rewarded for making your bet. Maybe not as much fun as picking winners but surely a better way to be profitable.

Richard

09-12-2018, 01:26 PM	#7
rdiam Grade 1 Join Date: Sep 2016 Posts: 606	Mindset Jeebs/Navyvet: Please don't forget the mindset needed to truly make $ betting horses. We are not looking to pick winners. If you want to pick winners, there is nothing better than the tote board, since favorites currently win close to 40% of the time. In fact, if you limit the subset to favorites going off less than even money, you will hit close to 50%. But here is the catch: you will lose $. Instead, look at this as a game of probability versus payout. Every horse has some finite chance to win. By selecting "win contenders" we are trying to reduce the workload and narrow the field. If the favorite is legit, win bets are probably a pass since most cannot compete with the implied lower takeout the large bettors receive via substantial rebates. You can only earn $ in the 60% or so races where the favorite is vulnerable, or even better, is false and likely to run out of the money. This is where one's efforts should be focused: which 1 or 2 (or sometimes even 3) horses can beat the favorite. At a minimum, if you cannot classify the favorite as vulnerable, you need to find at least 1 horse going off at 3-1 or less that will not win in order to overcome the track take. This is the math of the game we play. Regarding software and screens (Navyvet): by all means use what you like, but remember your goal is the find the 60% or so races where the favorite is vulnerable or false. But: we are in the midst of a technological revolution. Just like the I-phone has evolved since its introduction in 2007, so too has the Sartin methodology via RDSS. The last real contribution by Sartin et al was VDC. It is still quite useful and powerful, but it still relies on pace line selection. Why not also use more recent and powerful items such as CSR, CR+, PL, Rx3 (and soon to come in Rx+ BPP)? Sure, they are not "pure" Sartin, but remember, he is not around anymore to advance things. And most of the pure Sartin stuff was developed and programmed when current programming languages had not even been invented! Bottom line: let the software do the grunt work (picking pacelines, doing the matchup, comparing velocity versus deceleration, calculating speed and class, even picking contenders), and focus on finding first races where the favorite is vulnerable, and second which horses are contenders to beat the favorite, and third, whether you are getting sufficiently rewarded for making your bet. Maybe not as much fun as picking winners but surely a better way to be profitable. Richard